ReviewPhysical therapy research2021
Occupational Health Physiotherapy (OHP) Practice: A Comparison between Japan and Australia.
Review in Physical therapy research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of quick simple exercise on non-specific low back pain in Japanese workers: a randomized controlled trial.Environmental health and preventive medicine · 2023Trial
- The Cross-Country Comparison Model for Labor Participation (CCC Model for LP) of Persons with Chronic Diseases.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to adapt a pre-existing cross-country comparison (CCC) model to Occupational Health Physiotherapy (OHP) practice as a basis for locating and examining contextual factors that may influence OHP practice in Japan and Australia.
methodA secondary analysis was conducted of existing publicly-available data on OHP and related influential factors, following the five components of the CCC model: work-related legislation; labor market characteristics; culture; physiotherapy practice norms; and organization of OHP practice.
resultsLegislation in both countries promotes safe work and rehabilitation of work injured/ill workers. 2019 unemployment was lower in Japan with higher employment protection than Australia. Both countries have an ageing workforce and rising retirement age. Cultural differences relate to higher long-term orientation and uncertainty avoidance in Japan. Australia has higher individualism and physiotherapists are autonomous practitioners with direct access, which differs from Japan. Both countries have a national OHP subgroup, to date only Australia has OHP professional practice standards. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to compare OHP practice in Japan and Australia. Contextual similarities and differences observed may underpin OHP practitioner role and its enhancement in work-related musculoskeletal disorder prevention and management strategies, the return-to-work process, and development of this physiotherapy discipline nationally.
conclusionAdapting the CCC model to OHP practice enabled a structured exploration of resources and data, from which to extract and compare contextual factors that may shape OHP practice in Japan and Australia. This in turn may provide a useful springboard for further discussion about OHP practice internationally.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.